Interesting w/ the SOI readings from flaring recently have been neg,
and yet even as SSTs around equatorial currents in the east Pac are
warming anomaly, to the south and north of that anomaly they remains
cold.

What I am about to write is why this is absolutely the hottest place
on climate, right here, even as political headlines today are not
nearly as meaningful. If you can track, track, if you can see it, see
it. If not, STFU and listen until you can write something meaningful.
And as far as models predicting anything, like ENSO, they are all
crap because they start with SSTs and don't see the biological or the
electrical, especially how the biology modulates and becomes even
more important than what the sun is doing!

I am simply going to do an compare and contrast two graphics after
making some assumptions. These are pictures, built on the same
dataset for anamolies. The assumptions I will make are based on the
well founded observations and Fleming's right hand rule. I will
assume that Lindzen/Fu's La Nina "iris" are electrical to these rules
that when currents and winds are sustained they induct a field that
sustains cirrus, feedsback IR levels that in turn warm oceans and
increases precip.

This requires, per Fleming's rule, that the currents and winds are in
the east to west direction for electrical enhancement, where a vector
of electrons rises upward out of the ocean. OTOH, if the movement of
ocean current and winds are east to west, the resulting induction
gives a field of electrons moving into the ocean, against cirrus
behavior being enhanced, resulting in colder SSTs, low cloud IR
characteristics and so forth.

The warmer a conducter as in the oceans, the better it will induct.
Think of it this way. Imagine you had an electrical generater, and
instead of having copper wires used for the induction, you used
something less conductive. Result? Less power output.

In early January 1997 assume two cooling factors on the oceans in
general. One, we were post flaring min. While the flaring cycle is
not significant from a radiation standpoint, less than 2% change from
what I have read, it is electrically interesting, and enhances
cirrus, causing as much as a 20% change in heat energy from min to
max. Whether you agree with this as an electrical feature of flaring
or not, it doesn't matter--observation of warming during the solar
max is without serious contention. Two, we were post Mt. Pinatubo.
SOx emissions from volcanoes drop the phase change temp of cirrus and
hence reduce Gaia warming impacts. Again, whether you agree this is
an electrical feature or not, cooling and SOx have been observed and
go without serious dispute.

Now, switch to early January 2002 to date. This was during, following
a second peak of the flaring cycle. There has been a significant
lapse since a volcanic event, and SOx emissions in the air have been
low.

Note the La Nina conditions (low flaring, positive SOI) and the warm
SSTs running from the Hawaiian Islands to California. Also notice
that the Antarctica Southern Ocean's circumpolar contains warm
anomalies (which will figure in the El Nino that is to come). The
gyres in general at that time were colder. That means, per the rules
and assumptions I have given above, that the west to east
circumpolar, for instance, is going to have colder ocean temperatures
in general, and that causes LESS induction AGAINST cirrus, counter
intuitively WARMING SSTs. The west to east moving part of the gyres,
especially the N. Pacific, can also be seen to move AGAINST the
cirrus, electrically, LESS, producing the warm SSTs and then the
storms of the Pine apple.

Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically resulted in the
past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts glaciers and
produces cold SSTs from the cirrus behavior. And when these warmer
oceans get to moving west to east, as in off the coast of California,
they reduce cirrus strongly, cool SSTs, and dry things out.
California has received record low rainfall, consistant with this
notion.

It's all electrical, baby!

fredwx

You said when currents and winds are sustained they induct a field that sustains cirrus, feedsback IR levels that in turn warm oceans and increases precip.

Message 2 of 5
, Jun 5, 2002

0 Attachment

You said "when currents and winds are sustained they induct a field
that sustains cirrus, feedsback IR levels that in turn warm oceans
and increases precip.

This requires, per Fleming's rule, that the currents and winds are in
the east to west direction for electrical enhancement, where a vector
of electrons rises upward out of the ocean."...

The normal (non El Nino)flow of currents and wind in the tropics for
the most part is from East towards the West. Are you talking about
the normal conditions here? or did you mean West towards the East?

--- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/SeasonalClimateOutlook/SouthernOscil
> lationIndex/30DaySOIValues/
>
> http://psbsgi1.nesdis.noaa.gov:8080/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html
>
> Interesting w/ the SOI readings from flaring recently have been
neg,
> and yet even as SSTs around equatorial currents in the east Pac are
> warming anomaly, to the south and north of that anomaly they
remains
> cold.
>
> What I am about to write is why this is absolutely the hottest
place
> on climate, right here, even as political headlines today are not
> nearly as meaningful. If you can track, track, if you can see it,
see
> it. If not, STFU and listen until you can write something
meaningful.
> And as far as models predicting anything, like ENSO, they are all
> crap because they start with SSTs and don't see the biological or
the
> electrical, especially how the biology modulates and becomes even
> more important than what the sun is doing!
>
> I am simply going to do an compare and contrast two graphics after
> making some assumptions. These are pictures, built on the same
> dataset for anamolies. The assumptions I will make are based on the
> well founded observations and Fleming's right hand rule. I will
> assume that Lindzen/Fu's La Nina "iris" are electrical to these
rules
> that when currents and winds are sustained they induct a field that
> sustains cirrus, feedsback IR levels that in turn warm oceans and
> increases precip.
>
> This requires, per Fleming's rule, that the currents and winds are
in
> the east to west direction for electrical enhancement, where a
vector
> of electrons rises upward out of the ocean. OTOH, if the movement
of
> ocean current and winds are east to west, the resulting induction
> gives a field of electrons moving into the ocean, against cirrus
> behavior being enhanced, resulting in colder SSTs, low cloud IR
> characteristics and so forth.
>
> The warmer a conducter as in the oceans, the better it will induct.
> Think of it this way. Imagine you had an electrical generater, and
> instead of having copper wires used for the induction, you used
> something less conductive. Result? Less power output.
>
> In early January 1997 assume two cooling factors on the oceans in
> general. One, we were post flaring min. While the flaring cycle is
> not significant from a radiation standpoint, less than 2% change
from
> what I have read, it is electrically interesting, and enhances
> cirrus, causing as much as a 20% change in heat energy from min to
> max. Whether you agree with this as an electrical feature of
flaring
> or not, it doesn't matter--observation of warming during the solar
> max is without serious contention. Two, we were post Mt. Pinatubo.
> SOx emissions from volcanoes drop the phase change temp of cirrus
and
> hence reduce Gaia warming impacts. Again, whether you agree this is
> an electrical feature or not, cooling and SOx have been observed
and
> go without serious dispute.
>
> Now, switch to early January 2002 to date. This was during,
following
> a second peak of the flaring cycle. There has been a significant
> lapse since a volcanic event, and SOx emissions in the air have
been
> low.
>
> Okay. In Jan 97 there was incredible rains to California:
>
> http://water.wr.usgs.gov/flood97/
>
> This was from what is called the Pine-apple express. Now, go back
to
> the SST page:
>
> http://psbsgi1.nesdis.noaa.gov:8080/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html
>
> Go to January 7, 1997.
> http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo_archive/data/anomnight.1.6
> .1997.gif
>
> Note the La Nina conditions (low flaring, positive SOI) and the
warm
> SSTs running from the Hawaiian Islands to California. Also notice
> that the Antarctica Southern Ocean's circumpolar contains warm
> anomalies (which will figure in the El Nino that is to come). The
> gyres in general at that time were colder. That means, per the
rules
> and assumptions I have given above, that the west to east
> circumpolar, for instance, is going to have colder ocean
temperatures
> in general, and that causes LESS induction AGAINST cirrus, counter
> intuitively WARMING SSTs. The west to east moving part of the
gyres,
> especially the N. Pacific, can also be seen to move AGAINST the
> cirrus, electrically, LESS, producing the warm SSTs and then the
> storms of the Pine apple.
>
> Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically resulted in
the
> past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts glaciers and
> produces cold SSTs from the cirrus behavior. And when these warmer
> oceans get to moving west to east, as in off the coast of
California,
> they reduce cirrus strongly, cool SSTs, and dry things out.
> California has received record low rainfall, consistant with this
> notion.
>
> It's all electrical, baby!

fredwx

You said The west to east moving part of the gyres, especially the N. Pacific, can also be seen to move AGAINST the cirrus, electrically, LESS, producing the

Message 3 of 5
, Jun 5, 2002

0 Attachment

You said "The west to east moving part of the gyres,
especially the N. Pacific, can also be seen to move AGAINST the
cirrus, electrically, LESS, producing the warm SSTs and then the
storms of the Pine apple."..

You lost me here since the currents flow from off the California
coast towards Hawaii (from the East towards the West)??

--- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/SeasonalClimateOutlook/SouthernOscil
> lationIndex/30DaySOIValues/
>
> http://psbsgi1.nesdis.noaa.gov:8080/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html
>
> Interesting w/ the SOI readings from flaring recently have been
neg,
> and yet even as SSTs around equatorial currents in the east Pac are
> warming anomaly, to the south and north of that anomaly they
remains
> cold.
>
> What I am about to write is why this is absolutely the hottest
place
> on climate, right here, even as political headlines today are not
> nearly as meaningful. If you can track, track, if you can see it,
see
> it. If not, STFU and listen until you can write something
meaningful.
> And as far as models predicting anything, like ENSO, they are all
> crap because they start with SSTs and don't see the biological or
the
> electrical, especially how the biology modulates and becomes even
> more important than what the sun is doing!
>
> I am simply going to do an compare and contrast two graphics after
> making some assumptions. These are pictures, built on the same
> dataset for anamolies. The assumptions I will make are based on the
> well founded observations and Fleming's right hand rule. I will
> assume that Lindzen/Fu's La Nina "iris" are electrical to these
rules
> that when currents and winds are sustained they induct a field that
> sustains cirrus, feedsback IR levels that in turn warm oceans and
> increases precip.
>
> This requires, per Fleming's rule, that the currents and winds are
in
> the east to west direction for electrical enhancement, where a
vector
> of electrons rises upward out of the ocean. OTOH, if the movement
of
> ocean current and winds are east to west, the resulting induction
> gives a field of electrons moving into the ocean, against cirrus
> behavior being enhanced, resulting in colder SSTs, low cloud IR
> characteristics and so forth.
>
> The warmer a conducter as in the oceans, the better it will induct.
> Think of it this way. Imagine you had an electrical generater, and
> instead of having copper wires used for the induction, you used
> something less conductive. Result? Less power output.
>
> In early January 1997 assume two cooling factors on the oceans in
> general. One, we were post flaring min. While the flaring cycle is
> not significant from a radiation standpoint, less than 2% change
from
> what I have read, it is electrically interesting, and enhances
> cirrus, causing as much as a 20% change in heat energy from min to
> max. Whether you agree with this as an electrical feature of
flaring
> or not, it doesn't matter--observation of warming during the solar
> max is without serious contention. Two, we were post Mt. Pinatubo.
> SOx emissions from volcanoes drop the phase change temp of cirrus
and
> hence reduce Gaia warming impacts. Again, whether you agree this is
> an electrical feature or not, cooling and SOx have been observed
and
> go without serious dispute.
>
> Now, switch to early January 2002 to date. This was during,
following
> a second peak of the flaring cycle. There has been a significant
> lapse since a volcanic event, and SOx emissions in the air have
been
> low.
>
> Okay. In Jan 97 there was incredible rains to California:
>
> http://water.wr.usgs.gov/flood97/
>
> This was from what is called the Pine-apple express. Now, go back
to
> the SST page:
>
> http://psbsgi1.nesdis.noaa.gov:8080/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html
>
> Go to January 7, 1997.
> http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo_archive/data/anomnight.1.6
> .1997.gif
>
> Note the La Nina conditions (low flaring, positive SOI) and the
warm
> SSTs running from the Hawaiian Islands to California. Also notice
> that the Antarctica Southern Ocean's circumpolar contains warm
> anomalies (which will figure in the El Nino that is to come). The
> gyres in general at that time were colder. That means, per the
rules
> and assumptions I have given above, that the west to east
> circumpolar, for instance, is going to have colder ocean
temperatures
> in general, and that causes LESS induction AGAINST cirrus, counter
> intuitively WARMING SSTs. The west to east moving part of the
gyres,
> especially the N. Pacific, can also be seen to move AGAINST the
> cirrus, electrically, LESS, producing the warm SSTs and then the
> storms of the Pine apple.
>
> Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically resulted in
the
> past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts glaciers and
> produces cold SSTs from the cirrus behavior. And when these warmer
> oceans get to moving west to east, as in off the coast of
California,
> they reduce cirrus strongly, cool SSTs, and dry things out.
> California has received record low rainfall, consistant with this
> notion.
>
> It's all electrical, baby!

fredwx

You said Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically resulted in the past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts glaciers and produces cold

Message 4 of 5
, Jun 5, 2002

0 Attachment

You said "Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically
resulted in the past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts
glaciers and produces cold SSTs from the cirrus behavior. And when
these warmer oceans get to moving west to east, as in off the coast
of California, they reduce cirrus strongly, cool SSTs, and dry things
out. California has received record low rainfall, consistant with
this notion."

Could the warmer SST along the Antartic that are melting the ice
cause in increase in freshwater overlying the saltwater and thus
reducing the inflow of warmer surface currents from the north?

--- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/SeasonalClimateOutlook/SouthernOscil
> lationIndex/30DaySOIValues/
>
> http://psbsgi1.nesdis.noaa.gov:8080/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html
>
> Interesting w/ the SOI readings from flaring recently have been
neg,
> and yet even as SSTs around equatorial currents in the east Pac are
> warming anomaly, to the south and north of that anomaly they
remains
> cold.
>
> What I am about to write is why this is absolutely the hottest
place
> on climate, right here, even as political headlines today are not
> nearly as meaningful. If you can track, track, if you can see it,
see
> it. If not, STFU and listen until you can write something
meaningful.
> And as far as models predicting anything, like ENSO, they are all
> crap because they start with SSTs and don't see the biological or
the
> electrical, especially how the biology modulates and becomes even
> more important than what the sun is doing!
>
> I am simply going to do an compare and contrast two graphics after
> making some assumptions. These are pictures, built on the same
> dataset for anamolies. The assumptions I will make are based on the
> well founded observations and Fleming's right hand rule. I will
> assume that Lindzen/Fu's La Nina "iris" are electrical to these
rules
> that when currents and winds are sustained they induct a field that
> sustains cirrus, feedsback IR levels that in turn warm oceans and
> increases precip.
>
> This requires, per Fleming's rule, that the currents and winds are
in
> the east to west direction for electrical enhancement, where a
vector
> of electrons rises upward out of the ocean. OTOH, if the movement
of
> ocean current and winds are east to west, the resulting induction
> gives a field of electrons moving into the ocean, against cirrus
> behavior being enhanced, resulting in colder SSTs, low cloud IR
> characteristics and so forth.
>
> The warmer a conducter as in the oceans, the better it will induct.
> Think of it this way. Imagine you had an electrical generater, and
> instead of having copper wires used for the induction, you used
> something less conductive. Result? Less power output.
>
> In early January 1997 assume two cooling factors on the oceans in
> general. One, we were post flaring min. While the flaring cycle is
> not significant from a radiation standpoint, less than 2% change
from
> what I have read, it is electrically interesting, and enhances
> cirrus, causing as much as a 20% change in heat energy from min to
> max. Whether you agree with this as an electrical feature of
flaring
> or not, it doesn't matter--observation of warming during the solar
> max is without serious contention. Two, we were post Mt. Pinatubo.
> SOx emissions from volcanoes drop the phase change temp of cirrus
and
> hence reduce Gaia warming impacts. Again, whether you agree this is
> an electrical feature or not, cooling and SOx have been observed
and
> go without serious dispute.
>
> Now, switch to early January 2002 to date. This was during,
following
> a second peak of the flaring cycle. There has been a significant
> lapse since a volcanic event, and SOx emissions in the air have
been
> low.
>
> Okay. In Jan 97 there was incredible rains to California:
>
> http://water.wr.usgs.gov/flood97/
>
> This was from what is called the Pine-apple express. Now, go back
to
> the SST page:
>
> http://psbsgi1.nesdis.noaa.gov:8080/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html
>
> Go to January 7, 1997.
> http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo_archive/data/anomnight.1.6
> .1997.gif
>
> Note the La Nina conditions (low flaring, positive SOI) and the
warm
> SSTs running from the Hawaiian Islands to California. Also notice
> that the Antarctica Southern Ocean's circumpolar contains warm
> anomalies (which will figure in the El Nino that is to come). The
> gyres in general at that time were colder. That means, per the
rules
> and assumptions I have given above, that the west to east
> circumpolar, for instance, is going to have colder ocean
temperatures
> in general, and that causes LESS induction AGAINST cirrus, counter
> intuitively WARMING SSTs. The west to east moving part of the
gyres,
> especially the N. Pacific, can also be seen to move AGAINST the
> cirrus, electrically, LESS, producing the warm SSTs and then the
> storms of the Pine apple.
>
> Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically resulted in
the
> past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts glaciers and
> produces cold SSTs from the cirrus behavior. And when these warmer
> oceans get to moving west to east, as in off the coast of
California,
> they reduce cirrus strongly, cool SSTs, and dry things out.
> California has received record low rainfall, consistant with this
> notion.
>
> It's all electrical, baby!

pawnfart

You said Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically resulted in the past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts glaciers and produces cold

Message 5 of 5
, Jun 6, 2002

0 Attachment

You said "Conversely, with warmer oceans, this has electrically
resulted in the past few months that the Southern Ocean both melts
glaciers and produces cold SSTs from the cirrus behavior. And when
these warmer oceans get to moving west to east, as in off the coast
of California, they reduce cirrus strongly, cool SSTs, and dry things
out. California has received record low rainfall, consistant with
this notion."

Could the warmer SST along the Antartic that are melting the ice
cause in increase in freshwater overlying the saltwater and thus
reducing the inflow of warmer surface currents from the north?

+++

There are two primary reasons why I doubt that the melting glaciers
present a fresh water capping issue that "blocks" the Pacific gyre.
This is consistant with the so-called conveyor belt theory
popularized by Professor William Calvin of Washington University in
Atlantic Monthly. The first reason is that the leading scholar
pushing this theory, Dr. Warren B. White of Scripps in 1999 dropped
his research following ENSO and all his papers were no longer
online. Then he started to study cloud behavior in India, focusing
on very complex cloud albedo models. In short, I think he too
thought it was about clouds. The second reason is speed. The
salinity wave moves very slowly if it moved just by diffusion and
mixing. At the same time, he noted a coupling of pressures and
salinity and temperatures, with interactions with the glacial ice,
but like I said, he seemed unsatisfied with his own results in terms
of explaining El Nino. The electrical explaination not only gives
the speed required to match the SSTs, but also links temperture and
salinity with pressures--namely because the more conductive the water
by being warm the more cirrus are reduced down wind from there, so
you will have these persistant alternating salty and warm and cold
and diluted patches he describes--including the interactions with the
ice sheets. IOW, electrical movements of cirrus explains his
findings--poor man gave up on himself. I emailed him and urged him
to join our yahoo group but he wasn't apparently interested or
thought Gaia was valid.

Another thing that has to be mentioned here. The Southern Ocean has
some life from the "upwellings" but doesn't have river sources of
biological materials. But if you think about, say, the N. Atlantic,
it is the ocean with the most rivers--yet is warmer and more saline
than the Pacific! Why? Gaia, of course. The rivers cause more
water to be taken from the Atlantic--because of the biological
material insulating the ocean bottoms.

==========

You said "The west to east moving part of the gyres, especially the
N. Pacific, can also be seen to move AGAINST the cirrus,
electrically, LESS, producing the warm SSTs and then the storms of
the Pine apple."..

You lost me here since the currents flow from off the California
coast towards Hawaii (from the East towards the West)??

+++

I would be lost too if not familiar w/ the gyres. Stommel is the big
researcher here of import, but there is also Eichmann and others.
One interesting scholar on this subject is none other than Ben
Franklin, who discovered the Gulf Stream when investigating why
English mails were coming late, and American fishermen explained it
to him and he documented their comments. But later it was proved
that the Gulf Steam was part of a 'gyre', meaning it had a circular
path. That was done by Prince Ranier's grandfather, who put
thousands of bottles out into the N. Atlantic in 10 languages with
instructions to mail the letters inside the bottles! The bottles
moved in a circle. Okay, here is the catch. While the gyre moves in
a circle, it is more of a spiraling path. What we are really
discussing is a bulge of about 4 feet mid ocean, off center west,
with the current on the surface moving "downhill". Coriolis right
turns this and you get a circular deal. BUT, essentially, half of
the gyre is moving the downhill direction from the center. Hence,
there is indeed a current moving generally SW, in reality we are
talking about a quadrant of surface currents moving SE, with coriolis
right turning that current. Get it? That is why the most cirrus
reduction, in terms of current direction, is in the NW quadrant of
the gyres, while the most enhancment is in the SE quadrant. That
said, these respective quadrants are warmer to the NW and colder to
the SE because of their paths from and to the equatorial waters . . .

===========

You said "when currents and winds are sustained they induct a field
that sustains cirrus, feedsback IR levels that in turn warm oceans
and increases precip.

This requires, per Fleming's rule, that the currents and winds are in
the east to west direction for electrical enhancement, where a vector
of electrons rises upward out of the ocean."...

The normal (non El Nino)flow of currents and wind in the tropics for
the most part is from East towards the West. Are you talking about
the normal conditions here? or did you mean West towards the East?

++++

This is more complex so that you have to break it down so you can see
what we are talking about electrically. The gyres move currents per
Coriolis in this right turning manner from the gyre's top center,
which is off centered west. I suspect that this movement is
conceptually from the fact that the tropics are warmest, and, hence,
as the air expands it spreads from the tropics with a Coriolis
twist. That gives you the gyres. But the equatorial is a
countercurrent to the gyres tropical edges. Now, the coriolis
movement also generally will move the warmest WATERS west. That is
why the West Pacific is warmer than the East Pacific. BUT, the
counter current moves still warmer WATERS . . . EAST.

NOW, enter winds. The SOI. This is the kicker because it shows how
it is electrical and not about SSTs and thermodynamics. If the winds
are moving from west to east, or the SOI is positive, the counter
current will be enhanced. That counter intuitively means SSTs in the
EAST cool! Why? Because the counter current, with these warm,
electrically conductive currents, with the winds moving west to east
is going to be even stronger and this means induction AGAINST cirrus,
and electrically, cirrus are reduced in there to the east. OTOH, if
the SOI is negitive, or blowing east to west, the counter current is
going to be reduced AND, please read carefully and slowly, the
gyres, which are not just about the part that coriolis turned east to
west along the North and South Equatorial, but about the movement SE
from the North gyre and NE from South gyre, that coriolis turns.
That means that an expanding pressure from the Eastern Pacific will
blow AGAINST cirrus REDUCTION. It will heat up the El Nino waters--
electrically, especially if sustained enough to alter the gyres
surface movements.

But what CAUSES the SOI? Enter the sun. Ion particles sorted by
SSTs and winds derived therefrom--that move the IR balances and the
balances of air pressures. That is why flaring patterns can be
predictive of the SOI and hence ENSO itself.

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.